A study conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has cast doubt over Israel’s survival beyond the next 20 years.

The CIA report predicts “an inexorable movement away from a two-state to a one-state solution, as the most viable model based on democratic principles of full equality that sheds the looming specter of colonial Apartheid while allowing for the return of the 1947/1948 and 1967 refugees. The latter being the precondition for sustainable peace in the region.”

The study, which has been made available only to a certain number of individuals, further forecasts the return of all Palestinian refugees to the occupied territories, and the exodus of two million Israeli – who would move to the US in the next fifteen years.

“There is over 500,000 Israelis with American passports and more than 300,000 living in the area of just California,” International lawyer Franklin Lamb said in an interview with Press TV on Friday, adding that those who do not have American or western passport, have already applied for them.

“So I think the handwriting at least among the public in Israel is on the wall…[which] suggests history will reject the colonial enterprise sooner or later,” Lamb stressed.

He said CIA, in its report, alludes to the unexpectedly quick fall of the apartheid government in South Africa and recalls the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, suggesting the end to the dream of an ‘Israeli land’ would happen ‘way sooner’ than later.

The study further predicts the return of over one and a half million Israelis to Russia and other parts of Europe, and denotes a decline in Israeli births whereas a rise in the Palestinian population.

Lamb said given the Israeli conduct toward the Palestinians and the Gaza strip in particular, the American public — which has been voicing its protest against Tel Aviv’s measures in the last 25 years — may ‘not take it anymore’.

Some members of the US Senate Intelligence Committee have been informed of the report.

The United Nations Human Rights Council confirmed that human rights violations have taken place in America and some European countries

The Guardian wrote that the United Nations announced in its latest report that America, England, Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, and Macedonia have violated human rights under the pretext of fighting terrorism.

The Guardian alluded to America’s terrifying prisons in Guantanamo and Abu Ghrayb and wrote that the transfer of prisoners to secret prisons in Europe was not possible without the cooperation of the governments in England, Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, and Macedonia.

The United Nations also stated in this report that the physical and mental tortures in these prisons are clear violations of human rights and international treaties.

The African continent over the long decades after its apparent independence from European occupation has been the victim of a strategic plan against its diamonds and has been destroyed. The diamond cartels constantly change the African governments and create wars so that they could bring their armies, the British special forces and other illegal armies, to interfere with African affairs.

The destruction of the African continent in the last few years has been accomplished under the banner of progress led by the imperialistic forces whose only purpose is ending national governments and destroying any African government that stands in their way.

This movement is being openly cooperative with the cartels led by George Soros, a billionare drug smuggler (Brazil: George Soros wants to legalize drugs). They have led the African continent into continuous war and hunger.

The Open Society Institute (OSI) and other companies connected with Soros which are financially independent, constitute a large number of independent and international groups which try to destroy African governments under the banner of a war against oppression and corruption. They also fight against the natural resources of this continent.

OSI was established in 1993 by the Jewish Soros with the purpose of supporting established foundations in central and eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. These foundations which started to form in 1984 announced that their purpose was aiding the countries who were changing from Communism. After this, OSI started its activities moving from the Soros Foundations Network to other areas of the world. Its main purpose was to regime-change; making non-democratic countries democratic. The Soros Foundations Network covers 60 countries, including America.

One of the controversial plans of the OSI is the Lindesmith plan and other plans which have a connection to the drug trade. The purpose of OSI, which is an independent organization, officially form the policies of governments in making them democratic and forming ‘human rights’ on the political, judicial, and economical scale. This foundation has performed many social activities such as showing a support of laws, teaching general health, and media services on local levels. But, at the same time, in order to achieve an international unity they followed the path of fighting corruption and any opposition to human rights. One of the announced goals of OSI is to encourage people to participate democratically.

But, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) presents a face to the nightmare. This foundation started its activities with the organization Publish What You Pay, under the leadership of George Soros, which was advertised by Global Witness, another organization financially supported by Soros. This foundation wanted countries who had expensive natural resources to give all of their archived dealings regarding these resources to a multi-national cartel and the English government.

It should be said that EITI officially announced that its purpose is to create worldwide commotion so that companies that benefit from mines must pay a portion of their profits and the countries where they work must pay a portion of their income. This foundation stated that 5.3 billion people live in countries that are rich in oil, gas, or mineral and with a correct government they could benefit from the profits of these resources. They believe that this would help put an end to poverty. But, if there are bad governments there will be nothing but poverty and corruption.

In 2002, the English Prime Minister, Blair, announced in Johannesburg that he agreed with the proposal of Soros. In 2003, Blair established EITI as an international organization based in London, trying to attract American support, and trying to openly control the natural resources of the world. The member-companies of EITI, which originally started with three companies: Anglo-Dutch Shell Oil, DeBeers, and Anglo American. Today, mineral companies such as AngloGold Ashanti, Barrick Gold, BHP Billiton, Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Gold Fields, Katanga Mining Limited, Newmont, and Rio Tinto, and oil companies such as Chevron, ConocoPhilips, Eni, ExxonMobil, Hess Corporation, Pemex, and Petrobras are included in it.

In 2006, the main chair of EITI settled in narudhj and lived with the capital of the companies under George Soros, the Jewish billionaire. In order to make EITI a branch of Soros, Paul Wolfowitz, who was the president of the World Bank at the time and who was one of the leaders of the Iraq fiasco, came to narudhj and participated in a conference with the aim of guiding third world countries to the industrial world.

With the passing of time, the public opinion started to recognize the bloodshed that was caused over diamonds – the expensive stone that is used as money for the mafia and para-military groups. Here, the foundation Global Witness (under the supervision of George Soros) which the cooperation of the most important diamond sellers brought the issue of bloody diamonds to London.

In 2000, the international diamond council circled Brussels, London, and South Africa. They were led by DeBeers, by Moris Tempelsman, the president of the diamond company Lazare Kaplan International in New York, and by Dan Gertler who was a billionaire Israeli diamond merchant. Change in the international diamond council in industrially usurping diamonds was confirmed by Global Witness and became a program of EITI.

Moris Tempelson, was born in Belgium and started his work in the Congo. After the Patrice Lumumba, the nationalist prime minister, was killed in 1961 Larry Devlin, the former CIA station chief who receive the order to kill Lumumba (although he claims that someone did the dirty job), became the liaison of the temporary government. Tempelson participated from this station in the British coup d’état of Kwame Nkrumah, the president of Ghana. He has now become an important figure in the American branch of DeBeers, an international diamond cartel based in London. Tempelson lived with Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis (the widow of John F. Kennedy) until her death in 1994. Alongside Felix Rohatyn and George Soros he is a power in the post-JFK Democratic Party. He runs the National Democratic Institute which is a part of the National Endowment for Democracy which is funded by Global Witness and many other companies under Soros.

Israeli rightwinger Dan Gertler is the grandson of Moshe Schnitzer, founder of Israel’s diamond industry, and the nephew of Schmuel Schnitzer, vice chairman of the World Diamond Council in charge of the Council’s liaison with governments and the UN. In the Bush-Cheney era, Gertler has taken over from Maurice Tempelsman the role of unofficial representative of the U.S. government in the Congo. In partnership with other Israeli billionaires and with rightist politicians such as Avigdor Lieberman, Gertler arranged with former Congo president Laurent Kabila to set up a diamond monopoly in exchange for Israeli arms and military training. In 2006, Gertler gave London-Zimbabwe-South Africa arms trafficker John Bredenkamp $60 million for mineral property in the Congo, shortly before police raided Bredenkamp’s home and office in England in the (soon aborted) probe of BAE Systems arms-deals corrupton in South Africa. The Bredenkamp deal allowed Gertler to become top shareholder in London’s Camec, the copper and cobalt mining giant in Congo.

With this apparatus behind him, George Soros is doing to Africa what he did in his native Hungary in 1944, when he helped the Nazi occupiers in the extermination of the Jews.

Eastern Europe is about to blow. If it does, it could take much of the EU with it. It’s an emergency situation but there are no easy solutions. The IMF doesn’t have the resources for a bailout of this size and the recession is spreading faster than relief efforts can be organized. Finance ministers and central bankers are running in circles trying to put out one fire after another. Its only a matter of time before they are overtaken by events. If one country is allowed to default, the dominoes could begin to tumble through the whole region. This could trigger dramatic changes in the political landscape. The rise of fascism is no longer out of the question.

The UK Telegraph’s economics editor Edmund Conway sums it up like this:

“A ‘second wave’ of countries will fall victim to the economic crisis and face being bailed out by the International Monetary Fund, its chief warned at the G7 summit in Rome….But with some countries’ economies effectively dwarfed by the size of their banking sector and its financial liabilities, there are fears they could fall victim to balance of payments and currency crises, much as Iceland did before receiving emergency assistance from the IMF last year.” (UK Telegraph)

Foreign capital is fleeing at an alarming rate; nearly two-thirds gone in matter of months. Deflation is pushing down asset prices, increasing unemployment, and compounding the debt-burden of financial institutions. It’s the same everywhere. The economies are being hollowed out and stripped of capital. Ukraine is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary have all slipped into a low-grade depression. The countries that followed Washington’s economic regimen have suffered the most. They bet that debt-fueled growth and exports would lead to prosperity. That dream has been shattered. They haven’t developed their consumer markets, so demand is weak. Capital is scarce and businesses are being forced to deleverage to avoid default. All of Eastern Europe has gotten a margin call. They need extra funds to cover the falling value of their equity. They need a lifeline from the IMF or their economies will continue to crumble.

The UK Telegraph’s economics correspondent Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has written a series of articles about Eastern Europe. In “Failure to save East Europe will lead to Worldwide meltdown” he says:

“Austria’s finance minister Josef Pröll made frantic efforts last week to put together a €150bn rescue for the ex-Soviet bloc. Well he might. His banks have lent €230bn to the region, equal to 70pc of Austria’s GDP.

“A failure rate of 10pc would lead to the collapse of the Austrian financial sector,” reported Der Standard in Vienna. Unfortunately, that is about to happen.

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) says bad debts will top 10pc and may reach 20pc….

Stephen Jen, currency chief at Morgan Stanley, said Eastern Europe has borrowed $1.7 trillion abroad, much on short-term maturities. It must repay – or roll over – $400bn this year, equal to a third of the region’s GDP. Good luck. The credit window has slammed shut.

Almost all East bloc debts are owed to West Europe, especially Austrian, Swedish, Greek, Italian, and Belgian banks. En plus, Europeans account for an astonishing 74pc of the entire $4.9 trillion portfolio of loans to emerging markets. They are five times more exposed to this latest bust than American or Japanese banks, and they are 50pc more leveraged (IMF data). (Ambrose Evans-Pritchard UK Telegraph)

An economic crisis is quickly turning into a political crisis. Riots have broken out in capitals across Eastern Europe. Mr. Geithner had better be paying attention. The prospects for political upheaval are growing. Public anxiety can spill out onto the streets at a moments notice. Governments must act quickly and with resolve. These countries need hard currency and guarantees of support. If they don’t get help, the simmering public fury will turn into something much more lethal.

UK Telegraph’s economics correspondent Ambrose Evans-Pritchard:

“Global banks have so far written down half the $2,200bn losses estimated by the IMF. On top of this, EU banks have $1,600bn of exposure to Eastern Europe — increasingly viewed as Europe’s subprime debacle, and EU corporate debts are 95pc of GDP compared to 50pc in the US, a mounting concern as default rates surge.

“It is essential that government support through asset relief should not be on a scale that raises concern about over-indebtedness or financing problems. Such considerations are particularly important in the current context of widening budget deficits, rising public debt levels and challenges in sovereign bond issuance.” (UK Telegraph)

It’s the same wherever banks merged their commercial and investment branches. Debt has skyrocketed to unsustainable levels destabilizing the entire economy. The banks have been operating like hedge funds, concealing their activities on off-balance sheets operations and maximizing their leverage through opaque debt-instruments. Now the global economy is caught in the downdraft of a collapsing speculative bubble. East Europe has been hit hard, but it’s just the first of many bowling pins that will fall. All of Europe has been infected by the same virus which originated on Wall Street. Monday’s New York Times summarizes developments in the EU:

“Europe sank even deeper into recession than the United States in the closing months of last year, according to figures published Friday…The economy of the 16 countries sharing the euro currency declined by 1.5 percent in the fourth quarter, (an annualized drop of roughly 6 percent) according to the European Union’s statistics office. That is even worse than the 1 percent decline in the United States economy during that period, compared with the previous quarter.

“Today’s data wipes out any illusion that the euro zone is getting off lightly in this global downturn,” said Jörg Radeke, an economist at the Center for Economics and Business Research in London. (“Europe Slump Deeper than Expected” New york Times)

The “liquidationists” would like to see governments cut off the flow of funds to ailing financial institutions and let them fail by themselves. It’s Darwinian madness, like waiting out a heart attack on the kitchen floor instead of rushing to the hospital for emergency care. The global economy is decelerating at the fastest pace on record. 40 percent of global wealth has been wiped out. The banking system is insolvent, unemployment is soaring, tax revenues are falling, the markets are in shock, housing is crashing, deficits are soaring, and consumer confidence is at its lowest point in history. This is no time to cling to half-baked ideology. The global economy is undergoing a massive system-wide contraction which could spin out of control and plunge us into another world war. Political leaders need to grasp the urgency of the moment and keep the vehicle from careening into the ditch.

Anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim attitudes have been rising nearly in tandem in several European countries, apparently reflecting concerns over immigration, globalization and economic ills, according to a new international survey.

Anti-Jewish feelings were particularly strong in Spain, Poland and Russia – with negativity up significantly since 2006, according to the Pew Research Center’s polling. Anti-Muslim views were also strong in those three countries, as well as in Germany and France.

“There is a clear relationship between anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim attitudes,” said the report from Pew, released Wednesday. “Publics that view Jews unfavorably also tend to see Muslims in a negative light.”

Negative views of Muslims were also strong in several Asian countries: Half or more of the Japanese, Indians, Chinese and South Koreans surveyed said they had negative impressions of Muslims.

Negative feelings about Jews were somewhat less strong, from 32 percent in India to 55 percent in China, with Japan and South Korea falling in between.

The survey also underscored rising concerns in several predominantly Muslim countries, including Indonesia, about a struggle for dominance between Islamic fundamentalists and those favoring modernization.

In Europe, negative views of Jews and Muslims were strongest among older people, the less educated and those of the political right.

In some countries, including Germany, negative feelings toward Jews had risen along with favorable feelings – fewer people were left undecided.

On October 1, British police at London’s Heathrow airport arrested Dr. Frederick Toben – an Australian citizen and a Holocaust revisionist – during a stop on a flight from the United States to Dubai. He was detained on the basis of a “European Arrest Warrant” issued by German authorities that accuses him of publishing material online “of an anti-semitic and/or revisionist nature.”

Toben, a former schoolteacher who holds a doctorate in philosophy, has reportedly described the Holocaust as “a lie”. His Australia-based “Adelaide Institute” website allegedly carries the transcript of an interview in which he says there is “no proof” that the Hitler regime systematically exterminated Jews.

He is being held in custody until a British court decides if he is to be extradited to Germany. A hearing is scheduled for Oct. 17. A German prosecutor says that if Toben is extradited, he could be sentenced to five years in prison. He would then join two German citizens, Ernst Zundel and Germar Rudolf, who are already serving prison terms for having violated Germany’s “Holocaust denial” law.

In Germany it is crime to “deny, play down or justify” genocidal acts carried out by the Hitler regime. “Holocaust denial” is also a crime in France, Switzerland, Belgium, Austria, and several other European countries, as well as in Israel. Over the years many individuals have been fined, imprisoned or forced into exile for “denying the Holocaust,” including Robert Faurisson and Roger Garaudy in France, Siegfried Verbeke in Belgium, Juergen Graf and Gaston-Armand Amaudruz in Switzerland, and Ernst Zundel, Germar Rudolf, Guenter Deckert and Hans Schmidt in Germany.

An international poll released this week by the Project on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) found that outside the United States, many are skeptical that al Qaeda was really responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks.

Sixteen thousand people in 17 countries — allies and adversaries in Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America and the Middle East — were asked the open-ended question: “Who do you think was behind the 9/11 attacks?”

On average, fewer than half of all respondents said al Qaeda (although there was significant variation between countries and regions). Fifteen percent said the United States government itself was responsible for the attacks, 7 percent cited Israel, and fully 1 in 4 said they just didn’t know.

Among our closest allies, very slim majorities believe al Qaeda was the culprit. According to the study, “Fifty-six percent of Britons and Italians, 63 percent of French and 64 percent of Germans cite al Qaeda. However, significant portions of Britons (26%), French (23%), and Italians (21%) say they do not know who was behind 9/11. Remarkably, 23 percent of Germans cite the U.S. government, as do 15 percent of Italians.”

Whatever one thinks of “alternative” theories of who the perpetrators were that day, the results are an eye-opening indication of how profoundly the world’s confidence in the United States government has eroded during the Bush era. The researchers found little difference among respondents according to levels of education, or to the amount of exposure to the news media they had. Rather, they found a clear correlation with people’s attitudes toward the United States in general. “Those with a positive view of America’s influence in the world are more likely to cite al Qaeda (on average 59%) than those with a negative view (40%),” wrote the authors. “Those with a positive view of the United States are also less likely to blame the U.S. government (7%) than those with a negative view (22%).”

With the launch of the network, we are hoping anti-Zionist Jews will take up the Charter and Call-to-Action in ways that are relevant to their location and in partnership with existing Palestine solidarity work. Share your current work and support the building of international campaigns and strategies to collectively confront Zionism.

For the past two years, we have been building an international network of anti-Zionist Jews to support existing and seed new Jewish anti-Zionist organizing in solidarity with Palestinian resistance. The enemy we face is international, and what we can do is limited unless we find ways to work together across boundaries and regions.

We are building an international voice which challenges Zionism and its claim to speak on behalf of Jews worldwide. As an international force, we can contribute to the movement to defeat Israeli colonialism. Click here to read more about the history of IJAN.

Charter of the International Jewish anti-Zionist Network

We are an international network of Jews who are uncompromisingly committed to struggles for human emancipation, of which the liberation of the Palestinian people and land is an indispensable part. Our commitment is to the dismantling of Israeli apartheid, the return of Palestinian refugees, and the ending of the Israeli colonization of historic Palestine.

From Poland to Iraq, from Argentina to South Africa, from Brooklyn to Mississippi, Jews have taken up their quest for justice, and their desire for a more just world, by joining with others in collective struggles. Jews participated prominently in the workers’ struggle of the depression era, in the civil rights movement, in the struggle against South African Apartheid, in the struggle against fascism in Europe, and in many other movements for social and political change. The State of Israel’s historic and ongoing ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people from their land contradicts and betrays these long histories of Jewish participation in collective liberation struggles.

Zionism-the founding and current ideology that manifested in the State of Israel-took root in the era of European colonialism and was spread in the aftermath of the Nazi genocide. Zionism has been nourished by the most violent and oppressive histories of the nineteenth Century, at the expense of the many strains of Jewish commitment to liberation. To reclaim them, and a place in the vibrant popular movements of our time, Zionism, in all its forms, must be stopped.

This is crucial, first and foremost, because of Zionism’s impact on the people of Palestine and the broader region. It also dishonors the persecution and genocide of European Jews by using their memory to justify and perpetuate European racism and colonialism. It is responsible for the extensive displacement and alienation of Mizrahi Jews (Jews of African and Asian descent) from their diverse histories, languages, traditions and cultures. Mizrahi Jews have a history in this region of over 2,000 years. As Zionism took root, these Jewish histories were forced from their own course in service of the segregation of Jews imposed by the State of Israel.

As such, Zionism implicates us in the oppression of the Palestinian people and in the debasement of our own heritages, struggles for justice and alliances with our fellow human beings. (Read more)

Call-to-Action

Our pledge in the Charter will be carried out through our commitments to: 1) solidarity with Palestinian self-determination, 2) participation in global movements to end imperialism, and 3) the extrication of Jewish history, politics, community, and culture from the grip of Zionism.

To these ends, in this historical moment, the IJAZ Network will be a clear anti-Zionist Jewish point of reference to set an ideological pole, open space for non-Jewish anti-Zionist voices, and broaden support for Palestinian liberation.

Towards fulfilling this strategic role, we are calling anti-Zionist Jews to take up the following actions in the world. (Read more)

Disclaimer: My research shows that the creation of OPEC as well as “money given to the developing nations by the OPEC powers starting in 1974…dealt a blow to…banking institutions” which the Trilateral Commission would not tolerate. Indeed, I have an unpublished dissertation authored by a Ph.D candidate, who earned his doctorate because he successfully defended his dissertation at the University of Kentucky, which exposes the Trilateral Commission’s effect on the banking industry. That dissertation will be the first book News Source, Inc. publishes.

Created in 1973, the Trilateral Commission has exerted a dramatic effect on the entire Third World. Its effect on the Middle East is due to the vast amounts of oil in the region and the West’s need to have a cheap source of energy for industry and transportation.

The need to dominate the entire Third World, not the least of which includes the Middle East, is caused by the ever increasing quest for profit. Capitalism creates the necessity to earn more and more profit necessitating sacrifices in wages and benefits to those who are not owners.

To the extent that this organization needs to gain huge profits for those who share in their wealth, namely the stockholders, the Trilateral Commission is compelled or forced to control the government. Government, therefore, becomes subservient to the corporations so corporations will continue to make ever larger and larger profits.

Thus, the multinational corporations provide the means by which to dominate the federal government, controlling the Congress and parliaments of the following areas of the world: United States, Japan, and Western Europe.

Since the original research was completed, Japan and Western Europe have tended to pull away from the United States for various reasons which should be examined in another article. The United States, however, is still embraced in this phenomenon which is now hurting the poor and the middle class in the United States.

Transforming diplomacy to showing off, action to presentation, and pressure to protecting honor are the most important yard sticks of the present age. The issue of resolution 1835 shows all of these. Yesterday morning, the Security Council of the United Nations issued a resolution against Iran. The writers confessed to the fact and the text showed that it was only an emphasis of previous resolutions and that there was nothing new in it. After the resolution was passed, the American who seemed excited immediately tried to clarify the purpose of the P5+1 from this move so that no misunderstanding could remain. Rice, in the first minutes after the resolution was passed, told Reuters that Iran should recognize that the P5+1 is still strong. After her other foreign ministers made similar statements explaining the reasons behind the resolution. David Miliband, who has always been severely against Iran, told a French news agency that this resolution shows that the will of six powers in the world in regards to the Iranian nuclear program has not weakened. Frank-Walter Steinmeier showed his views in a prettier and clearer statement. The press in New York wrote narrated him saying that there was no new sanctions in the resolution against Iran, but it was a move made so that Iran would not become happy over the differences that arose in the P5+1.

Allow me to start the discussion by asking a question: What message should Iran take from the resolution? America, and apparently all of the six nations of the group, want Iran to take the message that the internal differences of the six nations was really a mistake in calculations made by Iran and that all of these countries are united in preventing a nuclear Iran. The recent debates in regards to Georgia and other issues, whatever they are, do not make any difference in relation to Iran. They are still firm in whatever was previously written in resolutions drafted by the Security Council of the United Nations. But, the truth is that 1835 can, in no way, relate such a message. Rather, the opposite. Just as many political analogists in Tehran conclude, the issuing of this resolution and the words that the western politicians said in regards to explaining their actions all show that Iran made the correct calculations. 1835 is nothing but a small Band-Aid placed over the deep wounds of differences that the P5+1 have. It is interesting that western politicians said that their purpose was to prevent Iran from becoming happier. It was a way of coming together despite differences and showing how they will react to Iran not hiding their differences which are clearer than the sun.

If we go a little bit back in the past the issue will become clearer. After the latest developments in Georgia where the west and Russia stood up, face to face, for the first time after the Cold War, the cooperation of the P5+1 felt a shock in regards to Iran. Some Russian and European sources wrote in the first days that the first sacrifice of this situation, before Georgia, will be the P5+1’s efforts for cooperation in quelling Iran’s nuclear program. A few days after the fighting the analysis was seen in almost all of the world’s media that great diplomacy has ended and Russia will not longer continue its cooperation with the west, including in regards to Iran’s nuclear program. Inside Iran, although America’s efforts to create divisions in the Caucuses were rebuked, but nobody believed that the problems in Georgia would take Russia out of the western camp and make them join with Iran. Almost all people inside Iran believed that Russia has always dealed with Iran and will continue to do this. They benefit from this and this is exactly what happened. Meanwhile, it is not necessarily because of Russia’s resistance, rather it is mostly because of the successful and effective resistance of Iran that the pressure on Iran has increased and sanctions of become more severe. The Georgia issue was only a small aid to this process.